[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 265
Citations 0
JAMA Network Clinical Guideline Synopsis
May 20, 2020

Review of the Southampton Consensus Guidelines for Laparoscopic Liver Surgery

Author Affiliations
  • 1James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus
  • 2Deputy Editor, JAMA Surgery
JAMA Surg. Published online May 20, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2020.0802

The use of minimally invasive laparoscopic liver resection has markedly expanded in recent years.1 There have been 2 consensus statements2,3 regarding the implementation and use of laparoscopic liver surgery. The Louisville Statement2 was published in 2009, which summarized the 2008 consensus conference of more than 300 attendees that sought to define the evolving field of laparoscopic liver surgery. The group concluded that laparoscopic liver surgery was a safe and effective approach in the hands of trained surgeons. The second international consensus conference for laparoscopic liver resections was held in Morioka, Japan, in 2014.3 These guidelines expanded on the Louisville Statement and consisted of an organizing committee of 43 experienced liver surgeons who evaluated 17 questions pertaining to the benefits, risks, and technical considerations of laparoscopic liver surgery. A persistent gap in knowledge existed regarding the potential advantages, development, and safe progression of laparoscopic liver surgery, prompting the development of the Southampton Consensus Guidelines for Laparoscopic Liver Surgery.

Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    ×